Monday, December 4, 2006

Does anyone else out there find the "Fair & Lovely" ads ridiculously insulting to women? I mean, we're all supposed to buy that if a woman isn't possessed of a flawless, clear, peaches-n-cream, FAIR complexion, she is to be denied everything good in life, like a career and marriage and dates? On the other hand, if said woman is actually fair, of course she will bump into a famous movie director who will offer her the lead in his next movie. Or, well, the fair photographer will have to outshine the model at a shoot. It's the law, dahling. These ads work on the premise that unless a woman is fair, she is worth nothing - not worthy to be a wife, or a career woman, or an actress, or a model, or, hell, even a woman. I mean, the "Fair & Lovely" for men came out only recently...I guess up until now it's been acceptable if men are dark-skinned, swarthy brutes...the women simply must be angelically fair (and, if possible, light-eyed). I, for one, am rather glad that the men are facing that particular prejudice now!! Rather evens the scales...but here's the thing: why does that prejudice exist in the first place?

I think what most people in this country tend to forget is that we are from this country, and along with that we get all the trappings - for the women it's the child-bearing hips and the always-problematic love handles around the waist; for the men...well, men's greatest problem is that they are men! No, on a serious note - we’re Indians, and the majority of us are bound to be darker than the whiter-shade-of-pale that is considered beautiful. Sure you'll have your Kashmiris and Punjabis and Sindhis and the odd Bengali and Maharashtrian who's white-as-snow, but the majority of us range from cafe-au-lait to espresso on the colour scale. And from the time we're born, it seems, we're trying to rid ourselves of any trace of colour that will lead to us being remotely tagged as "dusky” or "tanned" or just plain "dark." Even "wheatish" is barely acceptable these days! Honestly, when did one start equating skin colour with beauty? And since when was beauty the only thing that mattered?

Every where we look now, we see more evidence of just how shallow our society is becoming. It's not fair to villify just the "Fair & Lovely" commercials...I've heard of a TV series on Zee TV called "Saat Phere" that deals with one woman's anxieties over whether or not she'll find marital bliss, simply because she's dark skinned. Is she good-natured? Is she fun? Is she a good human being? Who cares? She's dark! That cancels out any possible good in her, doesn't it? Look at all the other Indian soap operas...the women are primped, pancaked and pasted to look like blue/green/violet/hazel/grey-eyed vixens with fair skin, when in reality, they're at least seven shades darker. But hey, they're gorgeous as long as they're white on-screen. Stepping off the silver screen and a little closer to real life, I have friends (and sometimes I wonder about calling them "friends") who refuse to ask out women, no matter how attractive, if they're not fair. Dark women just aren't beautiful, according to them. Once, I innocently asked whether they were then saying that Naomi Campbell and Tyra Banks were not beautiful, to which their prompt reply was that they'd be more beautiful if they were fair! There's no arguing with people who can't see beyond colour. While the situation isn't, of course, of the same magnitude as the racism and Apartheid in America and Africa was, the underlying prejudice is still the same - differentiating, discriminating and judging based on something that one is born with and cannot change. And, indeed, should not want to change. All the bleach and cream and wax and paint in the world isn't going to change the fact that underneath it all, you're still a human being with major issues, and a great deal of insecurity, if you need a fairness cream to get yourself a job and a spouse and a life!

All these commercials and billboards and TV serials do is capitalise on your insecurities. And, with 99% of the masses being tuned into the media the way they are, everyone seems to buy into the idea that fair skin is the way to a better world. Forget morals and decency and a sense of humour and education and ambition. Fair skin is the way to the future! No wonder India is entering the future with one of the highest crime rates in the world. In the future, we'll probably be housing the largest number of theives, rapists, dacoits, embezzlers and terrorists in the world. But I'm sure the ads will say it doesn't matter. Just as long as they have fair skin.

9 comments:

Unknown said...

i do comprehend ur indignation.It is logical to asseverate that quintessence of a human being lies primarily in his/her charecter and personality and that mensuration of an individual should not be derived from physical apperaence,however business ethics never articulates to focus on personal opinions,if u can recollect ur bussiness studies portions it will remind u tht it always looks at the bigger picture,its alright to run a business as long as the majority of the community accpets it,surely its safe to assume that their company statistics must have proved that their is a demand for their product product.However as i said i do not counter for ur opinion,i do respect and appreciate ur outlook and conceptions,keep going,perhaps one person can make a difference

Anonymous said...

you're completely right! I wish more people saw it in this light

Anonymous said...

I have a beef with the "Fair & Lovely" ads myself. When I was in Mumbai two years back, I think they pulled an ad -- the one where she can't get married. And my mother is still on my case when I get a shade darker!

I am wondering if you'd like to do a story -- article not blog -- about it for us, complete with images and bits of commercials we are able to get? I'm the editor of Stoopin, an e-zine of satire and humor to build bridges b/w the US and you got it, Brownies! (which for Americans is everyone east of Italy, west of Myanmar). Though most contributors are journalists w/major publications, we also want to hear fresh voices from these regions themselves.

I'd be happy to give u more details on it and hear ur thoughts and ideas. Feel free to write to me at amisha@stoopin.com. Would love to have your voice on this!

Anonymous said...

While I understand your indignation, I do not see how you can imply unfair play. Before I get to that, I don't think there is a significant discrimination against women who are not deemed attractive as far as career is concerned (except perhaps showbiz, even then - think Tun Tun).

If anything, there is a bimbo effect. Attractive women are assumed to be incompetent. Yes, in general women may suffer at the workplace, but it does not accrue from their looks. Recent examples: Cary Fiorina (ousted CEO of HP) vs. Indra Nooyi (CEO of PEPSICO).

Now back to mate selection and marriage. You can not question another individual's demand for a certain attribute or another individual's accidental possession of certain attributes unless and until:

a) You give up all your rights to demand a premium based on all attributes (such as height, slimness, sharpness of features, straight vs. wavy hair), size and shape

and,

b) You stop demanding certain features yourself, e.g. height, broad shoulders, George Clooney mannerisms etc.

It is hard to define an ideal world as far as mate selection is concerned. Everyone attempts to game the system so that the attributes they possess demand a premium, vs. the ones others possess. That's just the way it is. Life gave you a lemon? Well, too bad, make lemonade.

Namrata said...

barbarindian: appreciate ur views but dayum, did u HAVE to use the lemonade cliche? so trite!
and just because i have a george clooney fetish, doesnt mean i demand his mannerisms in a 'mate'. there're some of us women out there who still look for a wicked sense of humour and endless patience!!

Unknown said...

Why waste time mulling over the non-issues? No offence but just for the sake of the reader this topic has been flogged to death all over.
Viva Batista anyone?

Unknown said...

Well. Never thought searching for 'straitjacket for my mind' would land me up on a blog entry. (Why I was searching for that is a different matter altogether :) ). As a matter of fact I usually avoid blogs because of the "I woke up and brushed my teeth" nature some of them have, and the inane comments that follow (uh wait did I really say that? :)).

Well getting to the point this was something I was wondering about for a long time. While the reactions from guys after the "Fair and Handsome" ads started coming out were on delightfully expected lines :D , I was wondering about how women have dealt with/reacted to this all these years - eons rather. I guessed the lack of any such "reactions" was an indication of how we take "Fair is lovely" for granted. :) Of course one also had to consider the fact that these products and ads have been around for a long time, which could have contributed to the relative silence as well.

Besides, Naomi Campbell and WHITE?! Gad I don't even want to think about it. And considering my imagination is fertile enough to yield a ton of cotton every square metre, I guess you just made my day, my nightmares rather.

Oh and no offense meant, but could you please ask that friend of yours - who'd thought a 'fair' Naomi Campbell would look better - if he likes Michael Jackson? :) Again, no offense meant. :)

Anonymous said...

[... ] is another great source of tips on this issue[...]

Anonymous said...

comment2, jessica gomes nude, emewzu,